Americans rely (as usual) on technology for their problems.
Miracle technology will save us. We don't have to change. Technology is our attack, Steiner!
During shootouts, they distributed and measured microphones in city centers, and software then runs on it that recognizes the sounds of the gunshots and triangulates their origin.
Americans rely (as usual) on technology for their problems.
Miracle technology will save us. We don't have to change. Technology is our attack, Steiner!
During shootouts, they distributed and measured microphones in city centers, and software then runs on it that recognizes the sounds of the gunshots and triangulates their origin.
I haven't had a lot of encounters with the police - an accident or two, the occasional traffic stop, and a couple of parties in college that got out of hand. My observation has been that if you don't give them attitude or act like you might be a problem, you'll usually get treated respectfully. They're doing a dangerous and difficult job that we all need and expect them to do, and yet somehow a lot of us resent them for doing it. (If you don't like the law, don't blame the police and give them sh*t about it - they didn't write the laws, you and your representatives did.) Yes, sometimes they seem aggressive or bullying. Sometimes that's necessary for them to establish control of a situation.
I realize there are examples of police brutality and misconduct. There are also examples of misconduct among sailors, novelists, accountants, garbage truck drivers, interior decorators, librarians, unemployed bicycle repairmen, go-go dancers, doctors, dentists, etc. They are far and away the minority in every case, and to tar every cop with the "thug" label is no different and no better than the mindset that every citizen is a criminal waiting to get caught.
I agree with you, there are good and bad policemen, and most are ok and just doing their jobs. You are correct, the larger problem is with government and its laws, rules and regulations. Policemen (and military) are authorized to use and/or initiate deadly force, on behalf of the state. Initiating force is wrong, responding with force in self defense is ethical. There's a fine line there that is being ever more blurred by conflicting laws by corrupt politicians. This may sound strange to some, but I see them (the police/military) as victims too.
Common sense, ethics and morality have a place in these situations as well. If I was a policeman in this situation, and as long as the citizens were cooperating, I would have simply asked the dog's owner to remove the dog from the car and put him in the back of the police cruiser where dogs often ride. I thought having the folks kneel down and be zip cuffed on the side of the highway was extreme too. My 2 cents
I don't mean to offend anyone, but I really do love dogs, I really do care what happens to them, and I really do think that police brutality towards them needs to be addressed.
I think we need to see to it that police folk start attending animal (especially canine) handling seminars and tought how to use their brains instead of their guns. What is really amazing is that it never seems to occur to these thick-headed killers, how people will feel about having their best friend murdered right before their eyes. These policemen seem to utterly lack any empathy whatsoever. They fear a dog bite... it's as simple as that... they don't understand dogs and fear being bitten. It's pathetic that they resort to pulling out a gun just because they can. And guess what! They almost always get off with a slap on the wrist!
Federal police officer shot dog in Arundel park Anne Arundel authorities say man killed husky after dogs fought in park
August 03, 2010 By Jill Rosen and Brent Jones, The Baltimore Sun
Stunned dog owners and residents of a Severn neighborhood are shocked that authorities won't be charging a federal police officer who shot and killed a Siberian husky Monday night at a community dog park.
Bear-Bear, a brown and white husky that was about 3 years old, was playing in the Quail Run dog park at about 6:30 p.m., running off leash inside the fenced-in area, when the officer and his wife arrived with a German shepherd, who was kept on a leash. When the dogs began to play roughly, the federal officer asked Bear-Bear's guardian, his owner's brother, to call off the dog. But before he could do anything, the officer pulled out a gun and shot Bear-Bear, according to the husky's owner.
Bear-Bear, who belongs to Rachel Rettaliata, died of his injuries a few hours later. County police did not name the federal officer.
"I've been bawling my eyes out since 7 p.m. last night," Rettaliata said. "It's grief mixed with anger. We're so angry this guy was able to take our animal for what we feel was no reason at all.
"We still don't believe that he's gone. We just want so badly to be diligent about this. has to pay some sort of consequence for his foolishness."
A spokesman for the Anne Arundel County Police Department said no charges will be filed and investigators found no evidence of criminal activity.
Rettaliata adopted Bear-Bear about two years ago from a husky rescue. He'd been seized from a Delaware home where people had tied him up outside, largely leaving him to fend for himself in the elements.
Tiffany Greco, who fostered the young Bear-Bear and placed him with the Rettaliata family, said the husky had led a hard-knock life, starved and neglected, with mats in his long fur the size of softballs. But even though he was mistreated, she said he never became aggressive around people or dogs.
"He was a very lovey-dovey, happy-go-lucky guy," Greco said, adding that Bear-Bear at least had a taste of a good life with the Rettaliatas. "All this dog wanted to do was curl up on top of you."
She said that huskies have a rough way of playing that, to people who don't know them, can seem intimidating.
"They have a much different play style than other dogs," she said. "They're a rough-and-tumble breed. They're mouthy. Often people interpret that as being aggressive when it's really them just playing."
Actually, the family settled with the City for a sizable sum, and a jury awarded an even larger sum in their suit against the officers. That award is still being appealed.
I noticed that you've polished up your profile with links to at least two sites that could be considered pornographic, both of them registered to you. It occurs to me that you actually want to be banned. Is that considered some kind of honor among dog abusers? If you really want it that badly, why don't you just post the crap that got you banned from all the other sites?
As for me, I'm through with you. Just typing this makes me feel dirty. Post what you will, I don't see it anymore.
Thanks for the update about the family. It had been about a year since I read an article about them still grieving. it had seemed like that was the end of it and I hadn't read anything to the contrary.
What makes you think my sites are pornographic? http://iching-oracle.com/ is about the I Ching... it's a PHP script I wrote to allow ease of referencing comments/text of I Ching Queries. http://ebonlupus.org/ is where I post my poetry and art. It has adult content, such as an unmoderated forum where there may be adult language. Some of my art, in a separate gallery, is also adult... but you need full membership to be granted access to it, and that only comes after you've made enough posts to prove your maturity. I ban members I suspect are lying about their age. Also, the site is guarded by a ICRA label I purposefully set up with all the adult parameters to keep kids away... if their parents cared to have set up the proper filters, anyway. http://neutering.org/ is my sincere concern about a conspiracy to perform harmful invasive surgeries on dogs. It contains adult language and material of an educational manner to inform and possibly provoke a change in paradigm. It too is labelled with ICRA to protect children's ignorance about the world. http://wolfhowl.org/ is an educational site about Wolves.I also own http://emilcioran.com/ which is dedicated to one of my favorite philosopher/aphoristic authors.
I own several other domains I have closed. I've done all I can to be a responsible website author and still practice my right to free speech. I think you have made a lot of assumptions about me that are simply wrong. Someone has said things and you believed them.
I would have hoped you'd be more mature, but that is only a hope. You are also libeler as I have never abused a dog in my life... quite the opposite, I attempt to encourage people to regard canines with a deeper respect than mere servile playthings or vanity items. Dogs are living, thinking, sentient beings with needs and passions that humans are ashamed of or too arrogant to admit. I blame most of this on an out of date religious mythology of ignorance that makes people feel ashamed of nearly every biological act and to be at war with Nature and what is natural.
The story ends with the family standing around the marker of their dead friend... still trying to get justice with no one listening.
And yes, I have committed abominable acts, as have we all. Youth can bring harsh lessons. All I want to know is that the police involved with the incident gave enough of a damn to fix their error... so that it isn't repeated.
Actually, the family settled with the City for a sizable sum, and a jury awarded an even larger sum in their suit against the officers. That award is still being appealed.
I noticed that you've polished up your profile with links to at least two sites that could be considered pornographic, both of them registered to you. It occurs to me that you actually want to be banned. Is that considered some kind of honor among dog abusers? If you really want it that badly, why don't you just post the crap that got you banned from all the other sites?
As for me, I'm through with you. Just typing this makes me feel dirty. Post what you will, I don't see it anymore.
So in your opinion, the fact that they lost their lives is pretty much balanced out by their paychecks? Interesting to know that human life is so very cheap in your eyes.
I assume you have a job, too. Do you prefer your customers and employers treat you with respect and gratitude for the work you do, or do you prefer they tell you "it's your job, that's why you have a paycheck" and despise you for the mistakes of your coworkers?
That they put their lives on the line & lose their lives the way they did is expected in disasterous situations. It comes with the territory of being a cop much the same as dying comes with the territory of being a soldier. That cops or firemen died does not make them more of a 'hero" than the civilians who involved themselves in the rescues. Quite the contrary, its the civilians that are the real heroes yet its the firemen & cops that the media & entertainment industry punt as heroes when all they were doing was their job.
I suppose it would help to know the end story behind this, but after 8 years . . .
And you would know about abominable acts, wouldn't you?
The story ends with the family standing around the marker of their dead friend... still trying to get justice with no one listening.
And yes, I have committed abominable acts, as have we all. Youth can bring harsh lessons. All I want to know is that the police involved with the incident gave enough of a damn to fix their error... so that it isn't repeated.
Do you seriously think they went in there just because it was their job? ("Well, time to go up a burning skyscraper and earn that paycheck. I probably should have gone into copier repair.") They did it because they wanted to help people. That's why most police officers go into such a dangerous, demanding line of work - they're not exactly rolling in cash and benefits with easy hours.
If there are no selfless acts, and dying for another makes you good, wouldn't that make dying for another somehow selfish? It's hard to see how, frankly. Or are you suggesting that selfishly motivated acts are not necessarily bad?
And no one's justifying bad apples by example of good ones. Bad cops should be disciplined and prosecuted when appropriate. No one here is suggesting that the police have a license to do as they please. I'm trying to be reasonable and rational - it's called "putting things in perspective". No doubt you've made errors in judgment and hurt people, too - would you prefer to be judged by that (hopefully) small minority of your acts or by who you are and what you've done as a whole? Or, to make the comparison a bit more clear: no doubt some group of which you're a member has done bad things at some point. Do you want to be condemned and scorned for it despite your best intentions and actions?
I really don't know what they were thinking when they entered that building. I don't know what motivates any given mentality. Sometimes it's altruism, but often its not. Some people had rather face death than the ill repute of peers. In the military not doing your duty to kill people can get you killed.
Yeah... everything we do is selfish. We don't die for another unless there is, in that last willful act, some reward for us... even if that reward is simply doing all one can do to protect what one cares about and believes in.
In your last paragraph we agree... minus the first sentence. In answer to your final question: no... and yet I continue to be.
I was very concerned about this story when it first came out and I still am. Yeah, it's old, but I happened on it last night and it made me very angry again. I don't think the people that were abused ever saw justice... I think what that cop did was cowardly and wicked. But just because he wears a badge he holds some Nazi-like power over innocent people. I have never met a cop... ever... that wasn't some arrogant prick living a playground bullies dream. I am still absolutely certain there are some good cops... but given the human tradition of failing virtue, how long can they remain thus and keep their jobs? I brought it up again simply because I don't think abominable acts like this should be lightly cast aside and ignored... because how we think on these things and respond to them defines us.
A playful family dog shot down for no ill intent at all, before the family that loved him and begged for him to simply be left in the car where he was safe, indicates to me that this was a willful evil act that EVERYBODY saw... but no attempt at justice was ever seen. Because IT was just a dog? What about a best friend betrayed in cold blood? It makes me sick to my heart. This, to me, says something about our society we should be concerned about... we should be sick about, and intolerant of.
In the past eight years I don't think we've risen above this kind of apathy.
I suppose it would help to know the end story behind this, but after 8 years . . .
And you would know about abominable acts, wouldn't you?
I haven't had a lot of encounters with the police - an accident or two, the occasional traffic stop, and a couple of parties in college that got out of hand. My observation has been that if you don't give them attitude or act like you might be a problem, you'll usually get treated respectfully. They're doing a dangerous and difficult job that we all need and expect them to do, and yet somehow a lot of us resent them for doing it. (If you don't like the law, don't blame the police and give them sh*t about it - they didn't write the laws, you and your representatives did.) Yes, sometimes they seem aggressive or bullying. Sometimes that's necessary for them to establish control of a situation.
I realize there are examples of police brutality and misconduct. There are also examples of misconduct among sailors, novelists, accountants, garbage truck drivers, interior decorators, librarians, unemployed bicycle repairmen, go-go dancers, doctors, dentists, etc. They are far and away the minority in every case, and to tar every cop with the "thug" label is no different and no better than the mindset that every citizen is a criminal waiting to get caught.
There is bad in every group of people, just as there is good in every group of people.
So....? Shit happens. That's their job is to serve the public rather than brutalize them.
So in your opinion, the fact that they lost their lives is pretty much balanced out by their paychecks? Interesting to know that human life is so very cheap in your eyes.
I assume you have a job, too. Do you prefer your customers and employers treat you with respect and gratitude for the work you do, or do you prefer they tell you "it's your job, that's why you have a paycheck" and despise you for the mistakes of your coworkers?
Do you seriously think they went in there just because it was their job? ("Well, time to go up a burning skyscraper and earn that paycheck. I probably should have gone into copier repair.") They did it because they wanted to help people. That's why most police officers go into such a dangerous, demanding line of work - they're not exactly rolling in cash and benefits with easy hours.
If there are no selfless acts, and dying for another makes you good, wouldn't that make dying for another somehow selfish? It's hard to see how, frankly. Or are you suggesting that selfishly motivated acts are not necessarily bad?
And no one's justifying bad apples by example of good ones. Bad cops should be disciplined and prosecuted when appropriate. No one here is suggesting that the police have a license to do as they please. I'm trying to be reasonable and rational - it's called "putting things in perspective". No doubt you've made errors in judgment and hurt people, too - would you prefer to be judged by that (hopefully) small minority of your acts or by who you are and what you've done as a whole? Or, to make the comparison a bit more clear: no doubt some group of which you're a member has done bad things at some point. Do you want to be condemned and scorned for it despite your best intentions and actions?
